Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
MARITIME
ASSESSMENT OF SELECTED
ALTERNATIVE FUELS AND
TECHNOLOGIES
June 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 SUMMARY 3
2 BACKGROUND 3
1 SUMMARY 2 BACKGROUND
The shipping industry is under increasing pressure to Marine fuel currently contributes approximately
act upon the Paris Agreement and reduce green- 3 per cent to global man-made CO2 emissions. Most
house gas (GHG) emissions. The substantial emission seagoing ships are still using heavy fuel oil (HFO) or
reductions which must be achieved over the next marine gas oil (MGO), with a maximum sulphur limit
decades are expected to drive technology develop- of 3.5 per cent (mass) in force for HFO and 0.1 per
ment and, in particular, the introduction of low- cent (mass) for low-sulphur MGO.
carbon fuels. Furthermore, authorities are increasingly
paying attention to the consequences of hazardous Looking at the future with the IMO 2020 low-sulphur
NOX, SOX and particle emissions at the local level. standards and upcoming CO2 emission regulation
Around the world, air pollution is causing serious regime in mind, the share of conventional oil-based
health problems and premature death1, and local ship fuels will drop and the share of alternative fuels
air pollution will be subject to tougher regulations will grow.
over the coming years.
Prerequisites for introducing a new fuel include
Reducing emissions to air and introducing new availability of sufficient production and distribution
propulsion technologies are key challenges for the facilities as well as an adequate bunkering infrastruc-
worldwide transport sector, including shipping. The ture. In addition, new fuels in many cases require
world’s future fleet will have to rely on a broader extensive on-board modifications and a reversal to
range of fuels, propulsion solutions and energy a conventional system is complex and costly. This
efficiency measures. guidance paper intends to provide decision support
to customers when selecting a fuel for the ships they
All alternative fuel options are accompanied by order today and in coming years.
benefits and challenges. This guidance paper
provides an introduction to alternative fuels and
technology solutions. It includes an overview of
selected alternative ship fuels – LNG, LPG, methanol,
biofuel and hydrogen – as well as emerging tech-
nologies such as batteries, fuel cell systems and
wind-assisted propulsion.
International initiatives towards reducing CO2 In particular, the decision of the International Maritime
and other emissions are driving the research into Organization (IMO) to limit the sulphur content of
alternatives to conventional petroleum-based ship fuel from 1 January 2020 to 0.5 per cent world-
ship fuels. A wide range of alternative fuels are wide, and the recently adopted ambition to reduce
being discussed, and technologies such as fuel GHG emission by 50% within 2050 have the potential
cell systems and Combined Gas Turbine and to become game changers. As illustrated in Figure
Steam Turbine Integrated Electric Drive Systems 2, the combined amount of heavy fuel oil (HFO) and
(COGES), which can only be applied efficiently in marine gas oil (MGO) consumed by ships accounts
conjunction with cleaner fuels, have appeared on for no more than 25 per cent of the global diesel fuel
the agenda. and petrol production (2016 figures).
An impressive number of restrictions aiming to im- This is roughly equivalent to the amount of energy
prove the environmental footprint of shipping are in consumed using liquefied natural gas (LNG)
force or under preparation (refer to Figure 1). (24 per cent); however, LNG represents only a small
IMO GHG
strategy
Key ports in
All ports in Chinese Chinese area –
Chinese area –
area – 0.5% sulphur 0.5% sulphur
0.5% sulphur
EU CO2 monitoring,
Global fuel consumption
IGF Code in force reporting and
data collection system
verification
California sulphur
regulations to lapse ?
Adopted
AND TECHNOLOGIES
portion (approximately 10 per cent) of the overall scrubber installations available in 2020. This raises
gas market. the question whether high-sulphur fuel will even be
available any more if only 4,000 or even less ships
Provided that the IMO regulations are enforced as of can use it. The next question is at what price HFO will
2020, up to 48 million tonnes of ship fuel containing be available.
0.1 per cent or less of sulphur will be consumed
annually from that time onwards. Most of the fuel These practical challenges related to sulphur reduc-
consumed (70 to 88 per cent) will have a sulphur tion are knocking at the door. At the same time there
content between 0.1 and 0.5 per cent. This means is an accelerating worldwide trend towards pushing
that low-sulphur fuel may take the role of today’s down CO2, NOX and particle emissions. All of these
high-sulphur fuel. Assuming an installed base of factors are reason enough to intensify the search for
about 4,000 scrubbers at that time, no more than fuels and technologies that can help the industry
11 per cent of ship fuel usage will be high-sulphur meet the challenges ahead.
fuel. Latest estimates assume only 1,000 to 1,500
0.5% global
sulphur cap
EU ETS includes
shipping ?
6 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
LNG-powered vessels2 have been in operation since ■■ Deep-sea shipping: This includes large, ocean-
2000. As of 1 March 2018, 121 LNG-fuelled ships going vessels covering long routes, often without
were in operation and 127 newbuilding orders were a regular schedule. These vessels require fuel that
confirmed. Biofuels (including renewables) and is globally available. The energy source carried on
methanol[1],[2] are available at certain ports, and fully board must have a sufficiently high energy density
electrical/hybrid ships are emerging in the short sea, to maximize the available cargo space. For these
offshore and passenger segments. Based on current vessels, LNG can be a viable option once an ade-
technology, a distinction between short-sea and quate bunkering infrastructure is available globally.
deep-sea shipping should be made with regards to Sustainable biofuels, methanol and LPG can also be
applicability of various fuels: a choice, provided that they can be made available
in the required quantities and at an adequate
■■ Short-sea shipping: Vessels typically operating quality level.
in limited geographical areas on relatively short
routes with frequent port calls. Due to their rela- Based on current technology, batteries are viewed
tively low energy demand, these vessels are often as impractical as a source of main propulsion energy
ideal candidates for testing new fuels marked by for these vessels in the foreseeable future. Nuclear
high energy or fuel storage costs. The Norwegian propulsion is technically feasible for large vessels,
ferry sector is in the process of being electrified, but there are political, societal and regulatory
with about 50 battery-electric ferries to be phased barriers to consider. Various sail arrangements
in over the next few years. The use of hydrogen is (e.g. sail, kite, fixed-wing, Flettner rotors) have been
also technically feasible, and the Norwegian national tried on merchant vessels over the years. A new
road authorities, supported by DNV GL, are working Delft study concludes that there is significant saving
on the development of hydrogen applications and potential in wind-assisted propulsion on large
intend to put a new hydrogen-powered ferry into tankers and bulk carriers (Delft, 2017).
service by 2021[3].
Natural gas
2.43
(total)
Gas 2.19
Yearly diesel and
LNG 0.24 gas oil consumption
1.0
2) Not including the approx. 450 LNG carriers which also run on LNG.
[1] Stena Germanica bunkering in Gothenburg is the only present example of a ship bunkering methanol:
http://www.bunkerindex.com/news/article.php?article_id=18047
[2] Seven 50,000 tonne deadweight vessels are being built with the first-of-its-kind MAN B&W ME-LGI two-stroke
dual-fuel engine that can run on methanol, fuel oil, marine diesel oil, or gas oil:
https://www.methanex.com/about-methanol/methanol-marine-fuel#sthash.oW84bYPp.dpuf
[3] Breaking new ground in hydrogen ferry project:
https://www.sjofartsdir.no/en/news/news-from-the-nma/breaking-new-ground-in-hydrogen-ferry-project/
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 7
8 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
Among the proposed alternative fuels for shipping, however, on most seagoing ships their role is limited
DNV GL has identified LNG, LPG, methanol, biofuel to efficiency and flexibility enhancement. Batteries
and hydrogen as the most promising solutions. Among cannot store the huge amounts of energy needed
the new technologies we believe battery systems, fuel to power a large ship. Finally, wind-assisted propul-
cell systems and wind-assisted propulsion to harbour sion, while not a new technology, will require some
reasonable potential for ship applications. As has been development work to make a meaningful difference
demonstrated by our PERFECt Ship concept study for modern vessels.
(refer to PERFECt Ship video available on YouTube),
the well-known combined cycle gas and steam turbine The greatest challenges are related to environmental
technology has potential for ships in the power range benefits, fuel compatibility, the availability of sufficient
above 30 MW, provided that low-sulphur fuels are fuel for the requirements of shipping, fuel costs and
widely used in the shipping sector and/or high- the international rule setting by the IGF Code.
sulphur fuels are required to undergo extensive
treatment. The IMO continues its work on the IGF Code for
methanol and low-flashpoint diesel and the rules for
Fuel cell (FC) systems for ships are under develop- fuel cell systems. The other fuels named above are not
ment, but it will take time for them to reach a degree on the current agenda for the IGF Code. This should
of maturity sufficient for substituting main engines. be taken into consideration by owners contemplating
Battery systems are finding their way into shipping; LPG or hydrogen applications in the near future.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
CO2 emissions; g/MJ
Figure 3 illustrates the CO2 footprint of various fuels. Figure 4 illustrates the influence of various ship engine
technologies and fuels on NOX emissions. The value for
Green House Gas emissions (GHG) are measured HFO-fuelled Tier II diesel engines is used as a baseline
as CO2- equivalent emissions. Of all relevant fossil (100 per cent). The values are only comparable when
fuels, LNG produces the lowest CO2 emissions assuming the same rotational speed.
as can be seen from Fig. However, the release of
unburned methane (so-called methane slip) could The bars on the right-hand side of the diagram
reduce the benefit over HFO and MGO because represent the potential emission reduction through
methane (CH4) has 25 to 30 times the green house switching from Tier II to Tier III (NOX%).
gas effect compared to CO2. Nevertheless, engine
manufacturers claim that the Tank-to-Propeller (TTP) It is obvious that for all fuels given in the below figure,
CO2-equivalent emissions of Otto-cycle dual-fuel (DF) diesel-cycle engines must be equipped with exhaust
and pure gas engines are 10 to 20 percent below gas treatment systems to comply with the IMO Tier III
the emissions of oil-fuelled engines. Diesel-cycle limits. Only Otto-cycle engines burning LNG or
gas DF engines have very low methane slip, and hydrogen have the potential to remain within the
their TTP emissions are very close to those in the Tier III limits without requiring exhaust gas treatment.
illustration. This is also the case for COGES system This means that in most cases a switch of fuel is not
as proposed by the PERFECt Ship concept*. sufficient to comply with the Tier III NOX limits.
* For the working principle of DF and gas engines and the Otto-/Diesel Cycle principle comp. Annex
or e.g. Dag Stenersen, Ole Thonstad, “GHG and NOx emissions from gas fuelled engines”,
SINTEF Ocean AS Maritim, 2017-06-13, report no. OC2017-F-108OC2017 F-108 OC2017 F-108
10 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
Ship propulsion concepts differ in their principal 5. The COGES concept used in the PERFECt Ship
emission behaviour. This is illustrated in Figure 5 project is illustrated for comparison. It should be noted
below for diesel-cycle and Otto-cycle engines as well that it can only achieve efficiency improvements and
as the gas steam turbine concept as applied in the a CO2 emission reduction similar to piston engines
PERFECt Ship project. if the power demand is high enough (30 to 35 MW
as an approximate lower limit). If this condition is
1. Diesel cycle: HFO met, Tier III NOX compliance can be achieved with
The IMO rules can be fulfilled when applying internal means (dry low NOX burner) when operating
additional technical means, but at the cost of added on oil or gas. Methane slip does not occur. All things
fuel consumption and increased CO2 emissions considered, the emissions of COGES systems as
caused by the scrubber and exhaust gas recirculation proposed in the PERFECt Ship project meet all
(EGR) and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) foreseeable IMO limits. No external exhaust gas
equipment. cleaning is needed.
2. Diesel cycle: LSHFO/MGO It is obvious that all propulsion concepts have their
SOX compliance is ensured by the low SOX content pros and cons and that all of them are principally able
of the fuel. EGR/SCR equipment is required for Tier III to reach the emission limits with all fuel alternatives.
compliance. SCR increases the CO2 emissions. The best concept for a given application needs to be
determined on a case-by-case basis; it also depends
3. Diesel cycle: LNG on the owner’s preferences. DNV GL is prepared to
LNG is sulphur-free so there are no SOX emissions. assist customers in the decision-making process.
The effort required to achieve Tier III compliance is
lower than for oil fuel, but EGR/SCR equipment is
still needed.
SOx Future-proof
Otto NOx Future-proof
CO2 Reduced CO2 (CH4 slip)*
1.2
1.0
0.8
Brent crude oil
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Brent crude oil MGO HFO LNG LPG Methanol Biofuel
(Europe) (USA)
Apart from its price, a future fuel must be available to The energy consumption of the global fleet serves
the market in sufficient quantity. All fuel alternatives as the 100 per cent baseline.
discussed here could meet the requirements of the
shipping industry for the next ten years, assuming This comparison shows that for all alternative fuels,
only minor growth in shipping applications. The with the exception of LNG, a rapid rise in demand
question is what would happen if a fuel alternative would require massive investments in production
were to become so attractive that a large number capacity. In theory, a switchover of the entire global
of operators would want to adopt it for their ships fleet to LNG would be possible today since the
within a short period of time. current LNG production is higher than the shipping
industry’s energy requirement, and the share of LNG
Figure 7 gives an indication based on a comparison in the total gas market is only 10 per cent. Further-
of the energy content of the worldwide production more, LPG could likewise cover the energy need of
of specific alternative fuels with the energy need of the global fleet; however, in this case no LPG would
the shipping industry. be left for other users.
140
Approx. 10% of
natural gas market
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
HFO/MGO LPG LNG CH3OH FAME H2
Source: DNV GL internal evaluationsand vaious sources (e.g. ‘World LNG Report – 2015 Edition’, International Gas Union)
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 13
Environmental and price challenges are driving the energy can be considered as an alternative fuel source
interest in alternative ship fuels, but the number of in the widest sense. They have major potential for
realistic candidates is small. DNV GL believes LNG, ships running on short distances and can be used
LPG, methanol, biofuel and hydrogen to be the to boost the efficiency of the propulsion system in
most promising candidates. Among them, LNG has any ship. However, in deep-sea shipping batteries
already overcome the hurdles related to international alone cannot substitute fuel. With low-sulphur and
legislation, and methanol and biofuels will follow suit alternative fuels becoming more widely available,
very soon. It will be a while before LPG and hydrogen the well-known gas and steam turbine combined
are covered by appropriate new regulations within cycle technology represents a viable alternative
the IMO IGF Code, as well. for high-power ship propulsion systems.
The existing and upcoming environmental restrictions All fuel alternatives discussed here could meet the
can be met by all alternative fuels using existing foreseeable volume requirements for shipping over
technology. However, the IMO target of 50% GHG the coming years. A major increase in consumption
emissions reduction within 2050 is ambitious, and would require an appropriate increase in production
will likely call for wide-spread uptake of zero-carbon capacity; the only exception is LNG, which is available
fuels, in addition to other energy efficiency measures. in sufficient quantities today to meet the potential
Fuel cells can use all available alternative fuels and requirement of the shipping industry for many years.
achieve efficiencies comparable to, or better than
those of current propulsion systems. However, fuel Without taxation or subsidies, renewable fuels will
cell technology for ships is still in its infancy. The most find it difficult to compete with the prices of con-
advanced developments to date have been achieved ventional fossil fuels. LNG and LPG are the only
by the projects running under the umbrella of the fossil fuels capable of achieving a CO2 reduction.
e4ships lighthouse project in Germany, with Meyer CO2-neutral shipping seems possible only with fuels
Werft and ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems heading produced from renewable sources. If the shipping
the projects for seagoing ships. Wind-assisted pro- sector resorts to synthetic fuels produced from hydro-
pulsion could potentially reduce fuel consumption, gen and CO2 using renewable energy, the available
especially when used for slow ships, but the business alternatives will be liquefied methane (which is very
case remains difficult. Batteries as a means to store similar to LNG) and diesel-like fuels.
ALTERNATIVE FUELS
Hydrogen LPG
Hydrogen (H2) can be produced in Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is by definition any mixture of propane and butane
several different ways, for example by in liquid form. For instance, in the USA, the term LPG is generally associated with
electrolysis of renewable matter or by propane. Mixing butane and propane enables specific saturation pressure and
reforming natural gas. The production temperature characteristics.
of hydrogen through electrolysis could
be combined with the growing renew-
able energy sector which delivers, by
its nature, intermittent power only.
Conversion to hydrogen could facilitate
storage and transport of this renewable
energy.
ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
Batteries
Batteries provide the ability to directly store electrical
energy for propulsion, opening up many other oppor-
tunities to optimize the power system. Recent advance-
ments in battery technology and falling costs thanks to
the growing worldwide demand for batteries make this
technology attractive to shipping.
Battery stack
Wind-assisted propulsion
For thousands of years wind was the primary energy
source used to propel ships, apart from human muscles.
Today, wind-assisted propulsion is understood to be a
potential method of reducing the fossil energy consump-
tion of ships. Wind is an inexhaustible source of energy.
Sail propulsion
16 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
4 INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS
AND CLASS RULES
Shipping is an international industry, and international point fuels will need to individually demonstrate that
environmental and safety standards for shipping are their design meets the IGF Code’s general require-
developed by the International Maritime Organization ments. Their alternative design has to be submitted
(IMO), a United Nations specialized agency. The according to IMO 1455 (guidelines for the approval
International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases of alternatives and equivalence as provided for in
or other Low-Flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code) is the man- various IMO instruments) and accepted by the flag
datory IMO instrument that applies to all gaseous administration of the vessel. This individual, and in
and other low-flashpoint fuels in shipping, and to all some cases complex process will likely have a slowing
gas-powered ships other than gas carriers. The latter, effect on the introduction of alternative fuels not yet
and their use of low-flashpoint fuels, are covered explicitly covered by the IGF Code.
by the International Code for the Construction and
Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in DNV GL rules addressing the requirements of the
Bulk (IMO IGC Code). IGF Code include:
■■ Mandatory Class Notation “GAS FUELLED”: Rules
The IGF Code was adopted by the IMO in June 2015 for classification of ships, Part 6, Chapter 2, Section 5,
(MSC.391[95]) and went into force on 1 January Gas fuelled ship installations – Gas fuelled
2017. It is compulsory for all gaseous and other ■■ DNV GL also developed rules for gas-ready ships
low-flashpoint-fuel ships and currently (2017) covers as well as for ships using low-flashpoint liquid fuels
natural gas in liquid or compressed form (LNG, (e.g. methanol)
CNG). Regulations for methanol and low-flashpoint ■■ Voluntary Class Notation “GAS READY”: Rules for
diesel fuels as well as for maritime fuel cells are classification of ships, Part 6, Chapter 2, Section 8,
under development. Gas ready ships – Gas ready.
■■ Mandatory Class Notation “LFL FUELLED”´: Rules
The IGF Code contains obligatory provisions for the for classification of ships, Part 6, Chapter 2, Section 6,
arrangement, installation, control and monitoring of Low flashpoint liquid fuelled engines – LFL fuelled
machinery, equipment and systems using low-flash- ■■ Mandatory Class Notation “FC(Power)” or “FC(Safety):
point fuels, initially focusing on LNG. It addresses Rules for classification of ships, Part 6, Chapter 2,
all areas that need special consideration for the Section 3, Fuel cell installations – FC
usage of low-flashpoint fuels, taking a goal-based ■■ In addition, DNV GL was the first classification
approach, with goals and functional requirements society to develop rules for lithium-ion battery
specified for each section to provide a basis for the installations on board ships
design, construction and operation of ships using ■■ Mandatory Class Notation(s) “BATTERY (SAFETY)”
this type of fuel. and “BATTERY (POWER)”: Rules for classification of
ships, Part 6, Chapter 2, Section 1, Battery power
Technical provisions for other low-flashpoint fuels ■■ For further information regarding applicable rules
and other energy arrangements such as fuel cell for the alternative fuels and technologies covered in
systems will eventually be added to the code as this guidance paper, please refer to the correspond-
new chapters. For the time being, ships installing ing subsection of chapter 5. Further details can
fuel systems to operate on other types of low-flash- also be found in a recent DNV GL report for EMSA .
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 17
5.1 PRINCIPLES
5.2.1 General
The shipping industry currently uses heavy fuel oil The Delft study also estimates that MGO with a
(HFO) and marine gas oil (MGO) as fuels; HFO has a maximum sulphur content of 0.1 per cent will
maximum sulphur limit of 3.5 per cent (mass), while account for approximately 14 per cent of the fuel
low-sulphur MGO contains 0.1 per cent (mass) or mix by 2020, and that most of the fuel (80 per cent)
less. Ship fuel currently contributes approximately will have a sulphur content between 0.1 and 0.5 per
3 per cent to global man-made CO2 emissions. The cent. In practical terms, these fuels can be assumed
energy demand of the shipping sector is projected to be blends of HFO and MGO. If these predictions
to be approximately 314 million tonnes per year turn out to be accurate, the low-sulphur blend with
in 2020 (base case, MEPC 70-5.3, p. 26). With the up to 0.5 per cent sulphur will in essence replace the
year 2012 fuel mix, this would equate to 245 million current high-sulphur HFO.
tonnes of HFO (78 per cent) with an average sulphur
content of 2.5 per cent (m/m; MEPC 70-5.3, Tab 5) 5.2.2 Details on specific subjects
and 69 million tonnes of MGO (22 per cent).
Price
When the decision of IMO MEPC 70 to limit the sulphur For decades, the HFO price has been below the
content in ship fuel to 0.5 per cent takes effect in crude oil price and the MGO price has been above
2020, only vessels equipped with SOX scrubbers will that level, as Figure 8 below shows. As global demand
be allowed to consume HFO (>0.5 per cent sulphur for HFO will drop significantly after 2020, its price is
content). This will significantly reduce the global assumed to fall as well. However, there might be local
demand for high-sulphur HFO. variations depending on the actual HFO availability
in certain geographical locations. Since the majority
The fuel availability study prepared by the independent of vessels will run on a sulphur-cap-compliant fuel,
research and consultancy organization CE Delft, which some ports and bunker suppliers might actually
served as a basis for the IMO decision, estimates consider charging a premium price for continuing
that by 2020 around 4,000 vessels will operate with to deliver HFO.
scrubbers installed. If this assumption is correct,
only 6 per cent of the fuel mix will be HFO once
the sulphur cap takes effect. However, as per March Infrastructure
2018 only approx. 420 vessels with scrubbers where At present, there is a well-developed worldwide
known to be in operation or on order. This could MGO and HFO supply infrastructure in place. Ships
mean that the actual percentage of HFO in the fuel are supplied by bunker barges when in port, in most
mix by 2020 might be even lower than assumed by cases during cargo operations. The International
the Delft study, unless scrubber installations increase Maritime Organization (IMO) expects oil-based,
substantially in the meantime. fuel-cap-compliant fuels to be available worldwide
FIGURE 8: YEARLY AVERAGE OIL AND GAS PRICES RELATIVE TO THE PRICE OF BRENT
CRUDE OIL (SAME ENERGY CONTENT)
1.4
1.2
1.0
USD/USD
0.8
0.6
0.4
IFO 380/Brent MGO/Brent
0.2 Gas: Henry Hub/Brent Gas: EU/Brent
Gas: Japan/Brent Brent/Brent
0
1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016
as of 2020, a notion challenged by other parties. It is reduction (SCR), NOX emissions will also be higher, and
uncertain whether and to what extent high-sulphur CO2 emissions will be higher than those of most of
HFO will still be provided by bunker suppliers at all the alternative fuels discussed here. For a quantitative
geographical locations beyond 2020. comparison, please refer to chapter 3.
Regulations Technology
The IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee All ships intended to operate on high-sulphur fuel from
(MEPC) limited the sulphur content of ship fuel to 2020 onward will be required to clean their exhaust
0.5 per cent from 2020 onward. This regulation gases by using scrubbers. Scrubber technology is
applies worldwide. readily available. Even if the low expectations of IMO
MEPC 70-5.3 regarding high-sulphur HFO consumption
Emission control areas (ECAs) for SOX were introduced turn out to be true, thousands of scrubbers will have
along the North American coasts as well as in the to be installed by 2020. In ECAs, the NOX emission
North Sea and Baltic Sea in 2015. In these areas, the limits will require SCRs or exhaust gas recirculation
sulphur content of fuel is limited to 0.1 per cent. In (EGR) systems, in addition to scrubbers (depending
the North and Baltic Seas, it is permissible to continue on the keel-laying date). This technology is likewise
burning HFO and use scrubbers to clean the exhaust readily available.
gas to achieve an equivalent level of sulphur emissions.
Environmental impact
Oil-based ship fuel has a greater environmental impact
than the alternative fuels discussed in this guidance
paper. The sulphur content of low-sulphur ship fuel
is much higher than that of the other fuel types. Even
low-sulphur fuel will produce higher particle emissions
than alternative fuels. Without selective catalytic
20 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
5.3 LNG
10.3
10 9.0 9.3
8.7 8.0 8.0
0
Japan gas EU gas US gas IFO 380 0.1 MGO BW
(Henry Hub)
Source: DNV GL
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 21
Regulations Technology
The IMO IGF Code for LNG and CNG came into force Gas engines, gas turbines and LNG storage and
on 1 January 2017, establishing an international processing systems have been available for land
regulatory basis for the design and construction of installations for decades. LNG sea transport by LNG
LNG-fuelled ships. carrier also has a history going back to the middle
of the last century. Developments to use LNG fuel in
Other aspects, such as bunkering of LNG-fuelled general shipping began early in the current century.
ships, are subject to national regulations and therefore Today, the technology required for using LNG as ship
need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. For fuel is readily available. Piston engines and gas
example, only a limited number of ports have estab- turbines, several LNG storage tank types as well as
lished local rules for LNG bunkering. In addition, process equipment are also commercially available.
some LNG bunkering requirements and guidelines
have also been developed by SGMF, IACS and ISO.
CAPEX
LNG as ship fuel is rapidly approaching the status of a
Availability fully developed technology, with various technology
For the foreseeable future, there are no principal suppliers active in the market. As applications increase
limitations to production capacities that could limit and competition between suppliers heats up, we
the availability of LNG as ship fuel. LNG has a share can observe the CAPEX decreasing. CAPEX costs for
of approximately 10 per cent in the overall natural gas LNG systems are and will continue to be higher than
market. LNG production capacity is set to increase the expenditures associated with using a scrubber
significantly over the next five years. In 2016, the system with HFO.
global LNG production capacity was approximately
320 m t/a. This figure will increase by almost 40 per
cent to about 450 m t/a by 2020 (2017 World LNG OPEX
report; International Gas Union [IGU]). The OPEX costs for LNG systems on board ships are
comparable with the operational costs of oil-fuelled
systems without scrubber technology or an SCR.
Environmental impact Gas-fuelled engine systems have about the same
Natural gas from LNG is the cleanest fossil fuel avail- efficiency as conventionally-fuelled systems. For this
able today. There are no SOX emissions related to it, reason, the energy consumption of an LNG-fuelled
particle emissions are very low, the NOX emissions ship is roughly the same as that of an oil-fuelled
are lower than those of MGO or HFO, and other ship. Maintenance of a gas-burning engine may be
emissions such as HC, CO or formaldehyde from gas less expensive thanks to cleaner fuel. Currently,
engines are low and can be mitigated by exhaust gas the maintenance intervals of conventional and
after-treatment if necessary. Nevertheless, methane gas-fuelled engines are typically the same, but with
release (slip) must be considered when evaluating more operational experience to draw on, they may
the CO2 reduction potential of LNG as ship fuel be extended for gas engines. The maintenance
(maximum value is roughly 26 per cent compared to costs for the high-pressure gas supply system on
HFO). Low-pressure Otto-cycle gas engines burning board ships with high-pressure engines should be
LNG comply with the IMO Tier III NOX limit without considered. A number of ports offer discounts to
requiring exhaust gas treatment. LNG-fuelled ships.
5.4 LPG
20
Fuel price (USD/GJ, LHV)
15
10
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Time (year)
Brent oil Propane price (Mont Belvieu) Natural gas (Henry Hub)
Source: DNV GL
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 23
which are heavier than air. Therefore leak detectors engine would have to be equipped with EGR or
and special ventilation systems should be used. SCR systems. Both solutions are commercially
available.
The transport of LPG by sea is covered by the IMO
IGC Code, which also permits the use of LPG as fuel
for gas carriers. Technology
There are three main options for using LPG as
ship fuel: in a two-stroke diesel-cycle engine; in an
Availability four-stroke, lean-burn Otto-cycle engine; or in a gas
According to the World LPG Association, global turbine. Currently, only a single two-stroke diesel
LPG production in 2015 was 284 million tonnes, or engine model is commercially available, the MAN
310 million tonnes of oil equivalent. This is slightly ME-LGI series. In 2017, a Wärtsilä four-stroke engine
higher than the global demand for marine fuel. was commissioned for stationary power generation
Production has been increasing by approximately (34SG series). This engine had to be derated to main-
2 per cent annually over the last decade. tain a safe knock margin. An alternative technology
offered by Wärtsilä consists in the installation of a
The production increase has been most profound gas reformer to turn LPG and steam into methane by
in North America and the Middle East. Only 9 per mixing them with CO2 and hydrogen. This mixture
cent of LPG is used as transportation fuel for road can then be used in a regular gas or dual-fuel engine
vehicles, half of it in South Korea. Other uses of LPG without derating.
include homes (cooking and heating), the chemical
and other industries, and refineries. LPG can be stored under pressure or refrigerated. It
will not always be available in the temperature and
In regional terms, Asia accounts for the largest share pressure range a ship can handle. Therefore the
of LPG consumption. It is expected that at the current bunkering vessel and the ship to be bunkered must
production level, the demand for shipping can be carry the necessary equipment and installations for
safely covered until 2030, provided that demand for safe bunkering. A pressurized LPG fuel tank is the
LPG as ship fuel will grow slowly initially and remain preferred solution due to its simplicity, and because
at a moderate level. the vessel can bunker more easily using either
pressurized tanks or semi-refrigerated tanks without
major modifications.
Environmental impact
LPG combustion results in CO2 emissions that are
approximately 16 per cent lower than those of CAPEX
HFO. When accounting for the complete life cycle, The cost of installing LPG systems on board a vessel
including fuel production, the CO2 savings amount (e.g. internal combustion engine, fuel tanks, process
to roughly 17 per cent. system) is roughly half that of an LNG system if
pressurized type C tanks are used in both cases. This
The global warming potential of propane and butane is because there is no need for special materials that
as greenhouse gases is three to four times higher than are able to handle cryogenic temperatures.
that of CO2. This has to be taken into consideration
when addressing the issue of unburned LPG poten- On large ships, the cost difference between LNG
tially escaping into the atmosphere (LPG slip). At the and LPG systems is lower if the LPG is stored in
same time, using LPG virtually eliminates sulphur pressurized type C tanks, which are more expensive
emissions. LPG is also expected to reduce particulate than large prismatic tanks. Alternatively, LPG can be
matter (PM) emissions significantly. The reduction of stored at low temperatures in low-pressure tanks,
NOX emissions depends on the technology applied. which require thermal insulation.
5.5 METHANOL
Methanol can be produced from several different In Germany, the first methanol infrastructure chain,
feedstock resources, mainly natural gas or coal, but from production using renewable energy to trucking
also from renewable resources like black liquor from and ship bunkering through to consumption in a fuel
pulp and paper mills, forest thinning or agricultural cell system on board the inland passenger vessel
waste, and even directly from CO2 that is captured MS Innogy, was launched in August 2017.
from power plants.
Producing methanol from coal may bring the price Environmental impact
down, but it increases GHG emissions drastically. Methanol combustion in an internal combustion
Methanol is easy to produce from hydrogen and engine reduces CO2 emissions (tank-to-propeller [TTP]
CO2. Therefore the production of methanol from value) by approximately 10 per cent compared to oil.
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 25
The exact value may differ depending on whether Similar to LPG, only a single two-stroke diesel engine
methanol is compared with HFO or distillate fuel. is currently commercially available, the MAN ME-LGI
When considering the complete life cycle (well- series, which is now in operation on methanol tankers.
to-tank [WTT] and TTP) including the production Wärtsilä four-stroke engines are in operation on
of the fuel from natural gas, the total CO2 emissions board the passenger ferry Stena Germanica. Another
are equivalent to or slightly higher (in the order of possibility would be to use methanol in fuel cells (see
5 per cent) than the corresponding emissions of section 5.10 on fuel cells). A test installation has been
oil-based fuels. running on the Viking Line ferry MS Mariella since 2017.
The WTT emissions of methanol from renewable Methanol is a liquid fuel and can be stored in standard
sources (biomass) are significantly lower compared fuel tanks for liquid fuels, with certain modifications
to production from natural gas. Using methanol to accommodate its low-flashpoint properties and
virtually eliminates sulphur emissions and meets the the requirements currently under development for
sulphur emission cap. the IGF Code at the IMO. Fuel tanks should be pro-
vided with an arrangement for safe inert gas purging
It is also expected that particulate matter (PM) emis- and gas freeing.
sions will be significantly lower. The reduction of NOX
emissions depends on the technology used. In the
case of a two-stroke diesel engine, the NOX emissions CAPEX
can be expected to be approximately 30 per cent lower The additional costs of installing methanol systems on
than those of HFO, whereas in the case of a four-stroke board a vessel (e.g. internal combustion engine, fuel
Otto-cycle engine, the expected reduction is in the tanks, piping) is roughly one third that of the additional
order of 60 per cent, but not below Tier III NOX limits. costs associated with LNG systems. This is because
To comply with these standards, EGR or SCR systems there is no need for special materials able to handle
should be used. Both solutions are commercially cryogenic temperatures or for pressurized fuel tanks.
available.
OPEX
Technology The operational costs for methanol systems are
There are two main options for using methanol as expected to be comparable with those for oil-fuelled
fuel in conventional ship engines: in a two-stroke vessels without scrubber technology. Due to the
diesel-cycle engine or in a four-stroke, lean-burn small number of ships running on methanol, practical
Otto-cycle engine. experiences are limited.
5.6 BIOFUELS
5.7 HYDROGEN
5.7.1 General When used in combination with marine fuel cells, the
Hydrogen (H2) is a colourless, odourless and non-toxic emissions associated with other marine fuels could be
gas. For use on ships, it can either be stored as a minimized or eliminated entirely. If H2 is generated
cryogenic liquid, as compressed gas, or chemically using renewable energy, nuclear power or natural
bound. gas with carbon capture and storage, zero-emission
ships are possible.
The boiling point of hydrogen is very low: 20 Kelvin
(–253°C) at 1 bar. It is possible to liquefy hydrogen at 5.7.2 Details on specific subjects
temperatures up to 33 Kelvin (–240°C) by increasing
the pressure towards the “critical pressure” for Price
hydrogen, which is 13 bar. The energy density per The cost of H2 depends to a large extent on the price
mass (LHV of 120 MJ/kg) is approximately three times of electricity (in the case of electrolysis) or gas (in the
the energy density of HFO. The volumetric density of case of reformation), as well as on the scale of the
liquefied H2 (LH2) (71 kg/m3) is only 7 per cent that of production plant.
HFO. This results in approximately five times the volume
compared to the same energy stored in the form of Cost estimates from relevant literature for H2 pro-
HFO. When stored as a compressed gas, it’s volume duced from electrolysis as reviewed by DNV GL
is roughly ten to 15 times (depending on the pressure range between 3.5 and 8.3 USD/kg (1,170 to
[700 to 300 bar]) the volume of the same amount of 2,770 USD/t crude oil equivalent), averaging around
energy when stored as HFO. 5.3 USD/kg (1,770 USD/t crude oil equivalent).
Hydrogen is an energy carrier and a widely used The cost of hydrogen produced through natural gas
chemical commodity. It can be produced from various or biogas reformation ranges from 2.4 to 6.5 USD/kg,
energy sources, such as by electrolysis of renewables, (800 to 2,170 USD/t fuel oil equivalent), averaging
or by reforming natural gas. Today, nearly all hydrogen around 4.1 USD/kg (1,370 USD/t crude oil equivalent).
is produced from natural gas. These cost estimates include production, compression,
storage and transport.
For applications in the transport sector, production
by reforming from natural gas is currently the most As a reference: a price of 70 USD per Barrel is
common method. If the resulting CO2 would be approximately 510 USD/t fuel oil equivalent.
captured, this could result in a zero-emission value
chain for shipping. According to forecasts, the price of electrolysers
will fall in the near future, reducing the CAPEX and
Together with CO2, hydrogen can be used to produce consequently the production cost of hydrogen. The
methane, which can be used similar to LNG or synthetic location of production facilities may also play a role
liquid fuels which can be used as substitutes for diesel in the cost of H2. For example, electrolysis in areas in
or gasoline. Production of hydrogen by electrolysis is Norway with low electricity prices has the potential to
viewed as an opportunity to store and transport surplus drive the production costs down to between 3.5 and
renewable energy, thereby stabilizing the energy 4.1 USD/kg by 2020 (1,170 to 1,370 USD/t crude oil
output of solar or wind power plants. equivalent).
14
CAPEX HRS
12 OPEX maintenance
OPEX electricity for electrolysis and compression
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Electricity price (EUR cents/kWh)
Source: EC “Guidance document on large scale hydrogen bus refuelling”, March 2017
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 29
Technology CAPEX
Power generation systems based on H2 may even- Conventional energy converters like piston engines
tually be an alternative to today’s fossil-fuel-based will have similar added CAPEX costs as LNG-fuelled
systems. While fuel cells are considered the key engines. Storage tanks for LH2 will be significantly
technology for hydrogen, other applications are also more expensive due to lower storage temperatures,
under consideration, including gas turbines or internal higher insulation quality and fewer maritime appli-
combustion engines in stand-alone operation or in cations than LNG. All other equipment (e.g. piping,
arrangements incorporating fuel cells. ventilation, heat exchangers, pumps) will have similar
costs as in LNG systems.
Hydrogen-fuelled internal combustion engines for
marine applications are said to be less efficient than
diesel engines. Hydrogen fuelled piston engines for OPEX
ships are not available in the market. On land devel- Conventional systems like piston engines or turbines
opment is ongoing*. Possibly larger-scale industrial running on hydrogen will have comparable OPEX to
and maritime applications combined with waste those for oil-fuelled systems. The price of H2 varies
heat recovery solutions might be better suited for because the current market for hydrogen is part of the
high-temperature technologies such as solid oxide industrial gases market where individual contracts
fuel cells (SOFC) or even industrial systems using apply.
molten carbonate fuel cells.
Fuel prices might depend on energy prices for H2
Fuel cells combined with batteries (and possibly production and logistics costs (see above). Logistics
super capacitors) adding peak-shaving effects are a costs might be considerably higher than for LNG
promising option. Even proton exchange membrane or other gases. This might change when hydrogen
fuel cells (PEMFC), thanks to their flexible materials, production using surplus intermittent renewable
could improve fuel cell lifetime significantly when pro- energy is stepped up.
tected against the harshest load gradients. SOFC must
be applied in a hybrid environment using peak-shaving When hydrogen is produced locally by electrolysis,
technology to be a realistic alternative for shipping. the distribution costs are marginal. The lifetime of
energy converters (e.g. fuel cells) is shorter than that The energy chain perspective is important. Two main
of piston engines or turbines and depends on fuel production paths can be assumed for hydrogen:
quality and system operation management. The
expected crew training requirements could be ■■ Hydrogen produced from natural gas, the most
comparable to those of LNG/CNG. common production method today (in future
possibly combined with CCS)
Others ■■ Hydrogen produced by electrolysis using
One thing batteries and hydrogen have in common renewable energy
is that they represent potential game changers that
become increasingly relevant when the cost of pollu- In both cases, conversion of the original energy
tion (GHG or local pollutants) rises significantly and/ source to hydrogen will mean that some energy
or where strict emission limits apply. is lost.
In such a situation, the key parameters for fuel com- In an energy environment marked by a growing
parison might change. This has been experienced renewable energy sector, hydrogen and batteries
in the case of battery-powered ferries in Norway, complement each other. Batteries are a suitable
for example, which can be very price competitive means to store relatively small amounts of energy
(OPEX) with conventional fuels. At the same time, for a shorter duration, whereas energy conversion
they require a very different infrastructure, which is to hydrogen is better for long-term (e.g. seasonal)
typically associated with innovative, fast-charging storage of larger volumes of energy (e.g. using
technology at every stop and conventional charging underground caverns).
when the ferry is not in use (e.g. overnight).
32 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
DynaRig Kites
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 33
Infrastructure Availability
There is no infrastructure required to make use of wind The availability of wind as a power source is unlimited.
as an energy source. Specialized knowledge may be However, the quantity and quality of this energy
required for maintenance and repair work, most of source is not constant. As a meteorological phenom-
which may not be possible on board. Depending on enon, the strength and direction of wind is subject to
the size of an installed wind propulsion system, there frequent change. Global trade routes with relatively
may be restrictions for passing under bridges. constant, high wind conditions are best suited for
profitable use of this energy source, especially when
In addition, certain types of wind assistance systems combined with weather routing based on global
may impede ship loading and unloading. weather patterns and local forecasts.
A similar guideline for DynaRig systems is currently Various technologies are currently in some kind of
under development. project or trial stage; some solutions are commercially
available and can even be retrofitted. The following
These technical standards may additionally serve as choice of technologies does not intend to exclude
a means to satisfy statutory regulations and require- other, innovative or further developed approaches
ments, which may not necessarily in all aspects be and does not claim to be comprehensive.
prepared for wind-assisted propulsion.
■■ The Flettner rotor, also called Flettner sail or rotor
DNV GL class notations for sail assistance systems on sail, is named after its German inventor Anton
seagoing ships are in preparation. Flettner who developed the concept in the 1920s.
34 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
5.9 BATTERIES
800
600
400
200
0
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Source: DNV GL
36 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
Source: DNV GL
38 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
5.10.1 General costs will reach a competitive level after fuel cell
Fuel cells offer high electrical efficiencies of up to durability reaches the same level as the longevity of
60 per cent, as well as lower noise and vibration combustion engines.
emissions than conventional engines. The main
components of a fuel cell power system are the fuel
cells which convert the chemical energy stored in Infrastructure
the fuel directly into electrical and thermal energy Currently, relevant services are provided by the fuel
by electrochemical oxidation. This direct conversion cell manufacturers. With the exception of fuel cell
enables electrical efficiencies of up to 60 per cent, systems for military submarines, all present fuel cell
depending on the fuel cell type and fuel used. systems in shipping are non-commercial prototype
installations. The most advanced projects regarding
There are several different fuel cell technologies, future commercial application are those of the
including alkaline fuel cells (AFC), proton exchange e4ships lighthouse project. Commercialization will
membrane fuel cells (PEMFC), high-temperature include guarantee and lifetime technical support. A
PEMFCs (HT-PEMFC), direct methanol fuel cells service network similar to that for diesel engines has
(DMFC), phosphoric acid fuel cells (PAFC), molten yet to be established, but infrastructure development
carbonate fuel cells (MCFC) and solid oxide fuel is expected to start at the time of the prospective
cells (SOFC). The three most promising fuel cell market launch beyond 2022.
technologies for maritime use are SOFC, PEMFC
and HT-PEMFC.
Regulations
Fuel reformers convert the original fuel into hydrogen- The international rule base for the design and con-
rich fuel for use in the fuel cells. In addition to pure struction of maritime fuel cell applications is currently
hydrogen, fuel reformers enable the use of fuels such under development at the IMO as part of the Inter-
as natural gas, methanol and low-flashpoint diesel. national Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or
other Low-flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code). Existing class
The fuel cell is working in a combustion-free electro- rules form the basis of special permits. The current
chemical process. Only a reforming process might in- international regulatory framework is geared towards
volve a small amount of fuel combustion. Consequently, combustion engines. Apart from some class rules,
cell technology can reduce emissions to air dramatically. there is no binding international regulatory frame-
work for maritime fuel cell applications.
5.10.2 Details on specific subjects
The requirements for fuel cell installations which are
Price under development at the IMO might be integrated
Mass production, which is expected to occur beyond into the IGF Code within the scope of its first revision
2022, should allow production costs to reach a com- in 2020 at the earliest. Fuel storage and fuel supply
petitive level, as shown in Figure 17 below. Develop- systems must comply with the related chapters of the
ment projects are underway, and the most promising IGF Code, which currently covers LNG and com-
project for maritime fuel cells, e4ships, is aiming for pressed natural gas (CNG). Regulations for methanol
a market launch in 2022. With increased production, and low-flashpoint diesel are likewise under develop-
the impact of material costs will become a dominant ment and may be included in the 2020 revision of
factor in fuel cell prices. Maintenance and operational the IGF Code, as well.
FIGURE 17: POTENTIAL SCALE EFFECTS OF MASS PRODUCTION ON FUEL CELL STACK COSTS
100
Percentage of cost decrease (%)
90
80
70
60
50
Long-term marginal costs (projection)
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Environmental impact
The fuels typically used in fuel cells eliminate NOX, CAPEX
SOX and particulate matter (PM) emissions nearly Fuel cell technology is still under development.
to zero. Due to the high efficiency of fuel cells, a Current installation costs are between 3,000 and
reduction of CO2 emissions by 30 per cent is possible. 4,500 USD/kW of installed electrical power. Ongoing
An example is shown in Figure 18. When using pure developments are aiming to reduce installation costs
hydrogen as a fuel, tank-to-propeller (TTP) emissions by up to 1,000 USD/kW of installed electrical power
of CO2, NOX, SOX and PM are zero. by 2022 to be competitive with modern diesel engine
installations. The reason PEM cells are dramatically
cheaper than other fuel cell types is the automotive
Technology industry’s massive investments in this technology over
Only small maritime fuel cell applications with an the past 15 to 20 years. While still too expensive for
electrical power output of up to 100 kW are currently the car market, the cost of PEM fuel cells has dropped
in operation. Current research and development work to a level that is attractive for ship applications.
aims to make maritime fuel cell systems marketable
and scalable from 2022. It should be noted that the The expected cost of automotive PEM fuel cell sys-
lifetime of fuel cell systems and reformer units has not tems based on current technology is approximately
yet been shown to be satisfactory. Since 2016, a meth- 280 USD/kW when manufactured at a volume of
anol fuel cell system has been in operation on board 20,000 units/year. This number reflects the cost of
the passenger ferry MS Mariella which is operated by the complete fuel cell system. To build a complete
Viking Line between Helsinki and Stockholm. ship system that meets regulatory requirements it
will be necessary to integrate additional safety and
Another methanol fuel cell system is installed on interface components. Similar strategic goals are
board MS Innogy, an inland passenger vessels oper- being pursued in Europe: in its 2016 annual work
ated by the White Fleet Baldeneysee and Innogy. plan and budget, the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Joint
Proton exchange membrane (PEM) technology in Undertaking (FCH JU) aims to achieve a fuel cell
particular has reached a development level compa- system production cost of 100 USD/kW at an annual
rable with the dimension of automotive engines and production output of 50,000 units.
capable of handling ship load changes well.
ADVISORY SERVICES
DNV GL Advisory can support customers in a support you in making the best business decisions
variety of services of services for assisting with the on environmental technology, and help turn environ-
upcoming the upcoming fuel shift. For optimized mental performance into a marketing advantage.
compliance, we provide low sulphur decision-making
support tailored to your specific conditions, operation As a designated technical advisor for various gov-
and requirements. ernmental initiatives to reduce ship emissions, we
have deep knowledge of the regulatory policies and
To comply with stricter environmental regulations technical solutions.
and limit costs, shipowners need to evaluate alterna-
tives to traditional fuels and technologies. But which If incidents damage the fuel systems and other related
option is best for a ship’s actual operational setting? systems, we can help alleviate the problem.
We have a wide range of experience with trouble-
As marine and industrial engineers, economists and shooting, both on a design level and on board the
environmental specialists, DNV GL has the deep ship. DNV GL engineers can help customers to find
knowledge across multiple disciplines to offer reliable root causes for the problem and recommend mod-
solutions. ifications to reduce future damage in terms of costs
and/or even off-hire.
We advise the maritime sector on environmental
regulations and compliance options, we measure For more information, please contact
and benchmark your environmental performance, environmentadvisory@dnvgl.com
DECISION
INITIATION OPERATION
Emission
compliance HAZID for Automation
option installation testing (HIL)
DNV GL ACADEMY
Air pollution from ships in practice SOx Exhaust Gas Cleaning (EGCS) – in practice
The course objective is to gain advanced knowledge Become familiar with different SOx EGCs technologies
about exhaust emission legislation, abatement tech- available on the market, and understand applicable
nology and alternative fuels. requirements regarding SOx EGCs according to
MARPOL Annex VI & MEPC.259(68).
Low sulphur fuel – basics and experience
Participants will gain detailed knowledge for managing
the international requirements regarding sulphur For more information, please visit our training web
reduction for ship newbuildings and ships in service. page: www.dnvgl.com/maritime-academy
42 DNV GL – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
© Cody Williams
Pressure in Pa
2
p2
p4 4
p4 4
p1 1 p1 1
Figure 1: Diesel-Process: const. pressure during combustion (2à3) Figure 2: Otto-Process: const. volume during combustion (2à3)
The workhorse of shipping is the two-stroke engine. Two- Nevertheless, the pressure is low and therefore the gas can
stroke natural gas-fuelled engines have been available for the be provided either directly from a pressurised storage tank or
market since late 2012 when MAN presented their ME GI by use of a compressor. If a compressor is used, the specific
engine at HHI on 9th of November 2012. Wärtsilä as the second energy consumption of the compressor is below 1% of the lower
big player in this market sold their first dual-fuel two-stroke heating value of the gas (Hu), even if 10 bar pressure is required
engines in 2014 (RT-flex50, X62DF). The two-stroke technology as needed for the two-stroke low pressure engines from Wärtsilä.
for gas as a ship fuel has been on the market for less than two If the gas has to be compressed to a high pressure of 300 bar, the
years. This short availability of this core technology has to be compressor’s specific energy consumption will be much higher,
considered when looking to the relatively small number of approx. 4% of Hu (Figure 4). This is the reason the two-stroke
ships already running on LNG. MAN engines use pumps to increase the pressure to 300 bar in
the liquid phase and not in the gaseous phase of the fuel.
Low pressure engine
All of the four-stroke engines available today are low pressure Engine operating principles
engines. The fuel/air mixture formation takes place outside An overview of piston engine principles for gas-fuelled ships is
of the cylinder behind the turbocharger. This means that the given in Figure 1. The self-ignition temperature of natural gas
fuel gas pressure is approximately 5 to 6 bar because it must stored as LNG is too high to be reached by the compression
be higher than the charge air pressure after the turbocharger. cycle in the cylinder. Thus, the combustion must be initiated
Figure 3
46 Annex
DNV GL1 – Maritime Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies
5 bar
engine
W approx 0.5 % of Hu
Approx. 1 bar g
W approx. 4 % of Hu Two-stroke
A Heat exchanger high pressure
300 bar engine
Bottom line from tank (exclude loss of tank content in case of pipe failure)
by an ignition source. Engines running only on gas use a spark combustion process by injecting fuel oil and inject the gas into
plug to initiate the combustion process. The dual-fuel engines the burning air/oil fuel mixture. This also enables the operation
use so-called pilot fuel to start the combustion process. A according to the diesel cycle in gas mode as well and is the
small amount of pilot fuel is injected into the cylinder, where it reason that the gas pressure must be high (300 bar for natural
is ignited by the high temperature of the gas air mixture at the gas). The Wärtsilä engines inject the gas at the beginning of
end of the compression cycle. Typically, the amount of pilot the compression after the air has entered the cylinder. At the
fuel oil is below 1% of the energy used by the engine. low pressure at the beginning of compression, only a low gas
pressure is required. The gas/air mixture is ignited at the end
DF engines run on gas or on diesel fuel. In gas mode, the en- of the compression stroke by the pilot oil. The engine thus
gines run on the Otto-Cycle and in diesel mode they run on the works as an Otto-Cycle engine.
Diesel-Cycle (Figures 1 and 2). The main manufacturers of du-
al-fuel four-stroke engines are Wärtsilä, MAN and Caterpillar. Emissions
It is also possible to run diesel engines partly on gas. In such Compared to HFO, LNG greatly reduces emissions to air (Table
engines, up to approx. 70% of the energy is provided by gas 1 Environmental Emissions). In terms of NOX emissions, the
and 30% by diesel fuel. This option can, in particular, be a refit four-stroke and two-stroke low pressure engines reduce these
option for engines which cannot be converted to DF engines. emissions by 85% compared to HFO. While the high pressure
two-stroke engines still reduce NOX by 40% without exhaust
MAN and Wärtsilä also offer two-stroke engines for ship gas treatment. Particle emissions are reduced by 95% and
propulsion. The MAN engines compress the air, start the more. Because LNG does not contain sulphur, these emissions
Assessment of selected alternative fuels and technologies DNV GL – Maritime 47
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS
Emission component Emission reduction with LNG as fuel Comments
SOX 100% Complies with ECA and global sulphur cap
NOx, Low pressure engines (Otto cycle) 85% Complies ECA 2016 Tier III regulations
NOx, High pressure engines (Diesel cycle) 40% Need EGR/SCR to comply with ECA 2016 Tier III regulations
CO2 25-30% Benefit for the EEDI requirement, no other regulations (yet)
Particulate matter 95-100% No regulations (yet)
Table 1
Table 2
are eliminated completely. All emissions to the atmosphere rel- engine process, methane is mainly released as blow-by of the
evant for human health and the so-called “black carbon” effect cylinders into the crankcase, valve overlapping effects and
on global warming are reduced significantly by burning natural from incomplete combustion.
gas instead of HFO or MGO. As explained below, the effect on
CO2 emissions is also positive. The DNV GL study assumed the methane slip for four-stroke
engines at 1.5% of the fuel. Taking this into account, the GWP
DNV GL evaluated the greenhouse gas emissions from produc- is still reduced by 8 to 12%, as can be seen in Table 2. The
tion to the tank of the ship (Well To Tank; WTT) and the emis- greatest reduction in greenhouse emissions is reached by the
sions from the combustion of the fuel (Tank To Propeller; TTP) high pressure engines, which reduce the CO2 effect by 26%
in two studies in 2012. Methane has a much higher greenhouse compared to HFO.
warming potential than CO2. The Kyoto protocol gives Methane
a value that is 21 times the global warming potential (GWP) of
CO2. This means that an unburned methane molecule has 21
times the GWP of one molecule of CO2.
West Europe incl. Germany Korea & Japan South East Asia & India
Brooktorkai 18 7th/8th Floor, Haeundae I-Park C1 Unit, 16 Science Park Drive
20457 Hamburg 38, Marine city 2-ro, Haeundae-Gu 118227 Singapore
Germany 48120 Busan, Republic of Korea Singapore
Phone: +49 40 361495609 Phone: +82 51 6107700 Phone: +65 65 083750
region.west-europe@dnvgl.com busan.maritime.region@dnvgl.com sng.fis@dnvgl.com
DNV GL AS DNV GL
NO-1322 Høvik, Norway DNV GL is a global quality assurance and risk management company. Driven by our purpose of safeguarding life, property
Phone: +47 67 579900 and the environment, we enable our customers to advance the safety and sustainability of their business. Operating in more
www.dnvgl.com than 100 countries, our professionals are dedicated to helping customers in the maritime, oil & gas, power and renewables
and other industries to make the world safer, smarter and greener.
DNV GL – Maritime
Brooktorkai 18 DNV GL is the world’s leading classification society and a recognized advisor for the maritime industry. We enhance safety,
20457 Hamburg, Germany quality, energy efficiency and environmental performance of the global shipping industry – across all vessel types and offshore
Phone: +49 40 361490 structures. We invest heavily in research and development to find solutions, together with the industry, that address strategic,
www.dnvgl.com/maritime operational or regulatory challenges.
The trademarks DNV GL and the Horizon Graphic are the property of DNV GL AS. All rights reserved.
©DNV GL 06/2018 ID 1765300